Page 1 of 2
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 8:53 am
by GORDON

Been about 5 minutes... I haven't figured it out yet.
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:16 am
by TheCatt
I don't see anything.
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:19 am
by TheCatt
This one?

Got it.
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:52 am
by TPRJones
If that's the one, I remember looking at the numbers for a minute of idle pondering and no progress. Then I read the bit about kids being able to solve it quickly and got it instantly.
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:10 am
by TheCatt
TPRJones wrote:If that's the one, I remember looking at the numbers for a minute of idle pondering and no progress. Then I read the bit about kids being able to solve it quickly and got it instantly.
Yeah. That was the giveaway for me too
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:12 am
by GORDON
Damn, it displayed when I first posted it.
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:13 am
by TheCatt
I used math to solve it as well, and it took me about 1 minute.
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:13 am
by TheCatt
GORDON wrote:Damn, it displayed when I first posted it.
Hotlinking disabled type of thing.
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:00 am
by TPRJones
Personally I think the time given in the paragraph is crap. No way is any kid going to spend five to ten minutes on that. They'd be bored to tears after less than 30 seconds, so either they got it right away or wondered off to do something else.
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:24 am
by Leisher
Got it.
I not only disagree with the time given, but I want to meet the pre-school kid who even understands there's a puzzle to be solved there.
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:03 pm
by GORDON
goddammit
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:08 pm
by Leisher
I didn't get it instantly like Catt and TPR because I was WAY over thinking it.
It took me between 5-10 minutes before I realized my mistake.
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:12 pm
by GORDON
I am stuck on thinking... maybe the trick is that it's all just gibberish.
I can't not think like you guys seem to be able to do. 
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:30 pm
by TPRJones
Oh, wait, you still don't have it? Really?
Wow.
Okay, maybe this tip will help: I think the reason I read why kids are better at it is bullshit. They said that kids who don't understand numbers as mathematical symbols instead look at them as just drawings, and thus they get this very quickly. But then if that were the reason, how would they understand the numbers to the right of the equals signs as the solutions to each equation? They'd need little dot patterns or something.
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 2:10 pm
by GORDON
Ok, this was dumb.
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 2:23 pm
by Leisher
I assume that means you got it.
Want to feel better? Post the image to FB. Tell folks not to post the answer, but only when they "got it". They can IM you to find out if they're right.
Of course, that could backfire if all the stupid people you might know respond back in seconds with the right answer 
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 2:54 pm
by TPRJones
By the way, I was just kidding. I don't consider you slow for taking so long. It's one of those puzzles that intentionally relies on feigning ignorance to solve.
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 3:02 pm
by GORDON
Frustrating thing is that even while trying to figure it out, I consciously knew that something about it reminded me of a similar puzzle, the "Petals of the Rose" thing. But it took me a while to make the connection.
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 3:27 pm
by Cakedaddy
I'd look at it a couple minutes here and there. So, no idea what the total time was. >5 minutes, <20. I also agree that a preschooler wouldn't understand what they are looking at either. There would have to be more of an explanation. "Here's a picture. Solve it." Really? Everything stated above, agreed.
It's not a bad puzzle. The text above it is bullshit.
I solved it somewhat quickly. Does that mean I'm stupid?
Edited By Cakedaddy on 1334604495
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 3:35 pm
by TPRJones
Huh. Never saw Petals of the Rose before. Interesting.
I get it.